Patent Law Weblog

recent posts

about

  • Webinar on PTAB’s § 314(a) Discretion

    IPWatchdogUnified Patents and IPWatchdog will be offering a webinar entitled "In Denial: The PTAB's 314(a) Discretion, General Plastics, and NHK Spring" on May 21, 2020 at 12:00 pm (EDT).  Gene Quinn of IPWatchdog.com and Shawn Ambwani of Unified Patents will discuss recent changes to § 314, focusing on General Plastics, NHK Spring, the data, and practice tips around them, and also look to the factors in both petitioner's and patent owner's behavior that the Board is free to consider, analyze policy concerns, and recommend changes.

    There is no registration fee for this webinar.  However, those interested in registering for the webinar, should do so here.

  • Webinar on Protecting Cannabis IP

    MBHB Logo 2McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP will be offering a live webinar entitled "Four Key Points for Evaluating and Protecting Your Canna-IP: What Should You Be Doing, Now" on May 19, 2020 from 10:00 am to 11:15 am (CT).  In this presentation, MBHB attorneys Nicole E. Grimm, George T. "Trey" Lyons III, and Brett W. Scott will address the unique challenges the cannabis industry faces in obtaining and enforcing intellectual property rights, and the unequivocal importance of doing so in this space now, including four keys points for fashioning a comprehensive plan for your canna-business:

    • Patenting and monetizing cannabis innovations, including:
        – Patenting cannabis devices and methods of treatment surrounding hi-tech and biotech aspects of the cannabis industry;
        – Patenting the plant itself; and
    — Once you gain a canna-patent, what you can do to monetize and/or protect your investment from challengers.

    • Obtaining federal and state trademark protection for cannabis brands in light of:
        – The 2018 Farm Bill;
        – FDA Commentary and Memoranda; and
        – Recent judicial and administrative decisions.

    • Federal copyright protection for original works of authorship involving cannabis, including:
        – Logos/branding materials;
        – Educational and promotional materials; and
        – Other original works.

    • Other avenues for protecting your Canna-IP, including:
        – Trade secret best practices.

    While there is no fee to participate, attendees must register in advance.  Those wishing to register can do so here.  CLE credit is pending for the states of California, Illinois, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, and Virginia.

  • IPO Webinar on Section 101 Litigation After Berkheimer

    IPO #2The Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO) will offer a one-hour webinar entitled "Alice and Mayo at Trial: Section 101 Litigation After Berkheimer" on May 21, 2020 at 2:00 pm (EDT).  Jay Heidrick of Polsinelli, Kfir Levy of Mayer Brown LLP, and Ellisen Turner of Kirkland & Ellis, LLP will focus on litigation strategy now that many more Section 101 issues are going to trial — and even to a jury.  The panel will explain that plaintiffs should be careful what they wish for, address how Alice can arm defendants with a way to invalidate a patent that is easier than painstakingly mapping out how each patent claim was disclosed in prior art, and also how these arguments might also help to overcome the presumption of validity, and will also consider recent Federal Circuit decisions such as Exergen Corp. v. Kaz and CardioNet v. InfoBionic, which bear on whether and how eligibility questions may ultimately reach a jury.

    The registration fee for the webinar is $135 (IPO member) or $150 (non-member) (government and academic rates are available upon request).  Those interested in registering for the webinar can do so here.

  • Webinar on Protecting Trade Secrets During COVID-19

    ABAThe American Bar Association (ABA) Section of Intellectual Property Law will be offering a live webinar entitled "Putting the Genie Back in the Bottle: Protecting Trade Secrets During and in the Aftermath of COVID-19" on May 19, 2020.  Nicole Dominique Galli of the Law Offices of N D Galli LLC will moderate a discussion that will address what companies are doing about trade secrets in the world of COVID-19, and provide guidance and tips on how to put the trade secrets genie back in the bottle.

    The webcast is free for members and $199 for non-members.  Those interested in registering for the webinar, can do so here.

  • FCBA Program on Coronavirus Response in Europe, the U.S. and Brazil

    Federal Circuit Bar Association_2The Federal Circuit Bar Association (FCBA) will be offering a remote program entitled "Critical Developments in the West" on May 19, 2020 from 11:00 am to 12:00 pm (EST).  Penny Gilbert of Powell Gilbert LLP will moderate a panel consisting of Thierry Calame of Lenz & Staehelin, Klaus Haft of Hoyng Rokh Monegier LLP, Otto Licks of Licks Attorneys, and Robert Stoll of Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP.  The panel will look at recent developments in Europe, the U.S., and Brazil over the past few weeks, including how patent offices and courts are responding to the COVID-19 pandemic and how practitioners are handling litigation in the time of coronavirus, what steps are Governments taking to ensure the availability of ventilators, PPE, and diagnostics; potential therapeutics and vaccines for dealing with COVID-19 in the light of global demand and pre-existing patent rights, the balance being struck to satisfy the public need but compensate innovators, whether we will soon see a rise in IT and telecom litigation and FRAND disputes due to the heavy reliance on tech, and recent decisions in Europe which may influence where the battle lines are drawn.

    The webinar is complimentary for FCBA members and students, $25 for government and students, or $75 for private practitioners.  Those interested in registering for the program, can do so here.

  • Webinar on Sufficiency at the EPO

    J A KempJ A Kemp will be offering a webinar entitled "Sufficiency at the EPO" on May 21, 2020 from 16:30 to 17:30 pm GMT (Greenwich Mean Time).  Sarah Roques and Stuart Raynor of J A Kemp will consider the law surrounding sufficiency in particular in relation to the biotechnology and chemical fields, and also consider strategies that can be used by those on both sides of the sufficiency debate.  Topics to be covered will include:

    • Sufficiency and breadth of claim
    • How sufficiency is considered in respect of medical use claims
    • The relevance of sufficiency to claims defined with parameters
    • The relationship between sufficiency and clarity

    Those wishing to register can do so here.

  • Webinar on Identifying the New IP Normal

    IAMIPBC Talking Heads and iam will be offering a free webinar entitled "Identifying the new normal: what past downturns tell us about how the IP future will evolve" on May 20, 2020 from 11:00 am to 12:00 pm (EDT).  In IP terms, the COVID-19 crisis builds on two prior economic shocks:  the bursting of the dot-com bubble in 2000 and the 2008 financial collapse, which confirmed IP's status as a counter cyclical asset and led to market-defining events such as the growth of NPEs and the 2011 Nortel auction.  While some of the specifics of current events look very different to those of previous times, IP may once again see its status rise as a driver of value for many companies.  The webinar will explore what past downturns tell us about how the IP future will evolve.

    Those interested in registering for the webinar, can do so here.

  • Webinar on Patenting Vaccines

    Schwegman Lundberg WoessnerSchwegman Lundberg & Woessner will be offering a webinar entitled "Patenting Vaccines: A Look Back and the Road Ahead" on May 21, 2020 starting at 11:00 am (CT).  Warren D. Woessner, Janet E. Embretson, Monique Perdok and Robin A. Chadwick of Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner will review patenting opportunities and obstacles presented by the massive research effort to develop a vaccine against deadly viruses such as MERS, SARS, and COVID-19.

    While there is no cost to participate in the program, those interested in attending the webinar can register here.

  • The Plot Thickens: Sigma Aldrich Has Allowed Claims

    By Kevin E. Noonan —

    Sigma-AldrichFor several years, Sigma Aldrich has been prosecuting several applications (including USSNs 15/188,911; 15/188,924; and 15/456,204) claiming CRISPR technology that (it alleged) would be deserving of an interference with University of California's U.S. Application Nos. 15/9547,718 and 15/981,809, and reserving the right to supplement its request to include other patents and patent applications owned by the University of California Berkeley et al. (collectively "CVC") as well as those of owned by The Broad Institute and colleagues (see "Sigma-Aldrich Wants Its Piece of CRISPR Pie" and "Sigma-Aldrich Tries Again").  Such an interference, if declared, threatened to upset the CVC/Broad apple cart regarding CRISPR-Cas-9 patent ownership, Sigma–Aldrich alleging an earlier priority date than the Broad's earliest date and 3-7 months after CVC's earliest date:

    Image
    However, the U.S. Patent Examiner had taken the position that Sigma-Aldrich was not entitled to a Declaration of Interference until it had obtained allowed claims, and that CVC's earlier patent dates prevented such an allowance unless, inter alia, Sigma-Aldrich could swear behind the earlier patent application filing dates.  With significant justification, Sigma-Aldrich characterized this situation as a Catch 22 in view of the seemingly contradictory conclusion arrived at by both Patent Trial and Appeal Board (see "PTAB Decides CRISPR Interference — No interference-in-fact" and "PTAB Decides CRISPR Interference in Favor of Broad Institute — Their Reasoning") and Federal Circuit (see "Regents of the University of California v. Broad Institute, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2018)").

    The logjam was recently broken for two of these Sigma-Aldrich applications, the Patent Office issuing a Notice of Allowance for 15/188,911 and 15/188,924.  The allowed claims, including Examiner's amendments, are as follows:

    U.S. Application No. 15/188911:

    1. (currently amended) A method for integrating an exogenous sequence into a chromosomal sequence of a eukaryotic cell, the method comprising:
    introducing into the eukaryotic cell:
        (i) at least one RNA-guided endonuclease or nucleic acid encoding at least one RNA-guided endonuclease, wherein the at least one RNA-guided endonuclease is a clustered regularly interspersed short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)/CRISPR associated (Cas) (CRISPR-Cas) type II system protein, wherein the nucleic acid encoding the CRISPR-Cas type II system protein is codon optimized for expression in the eukaryotic cell,
    wherein the CRISPR-Cas type II system protein is a Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 protein including at least one nuclear localization signal consisting of comprising SEQ ID NO: 1 or SEQ ID NO:2 covalently attached to the C-terminal amino acid of the Cas9 protein sequence; and
        (ii) at least one engineered guide RNA or DNA encoding at least one engineered guide RNA, each guide RNA comprising
            (1) a first region at the 5' end that base pairs with a target site in the chromosomal sequence, and
            (2) a second region that forms a secondary structure which interacts with the at least one RNA-guided endonuclease; and
        (iii) at least one donor polynucleotide comprising the exogenous sequence;
    whereby the at least one guide RNA guides the at least one RNA-guided endonuclease to the target site in the chromosomal sequence where the RNA-guided endonuclease introduces a double-stranded break, the target site in the chromosomal sequence is immediately followed by a proto spacer adjacent motif (PAM), and repair of the double-stranded break by a DNA repair process leads to integration of the exogenous sequence into the chromosomal sequence.

    8. (original) The method of claim 1, wherein the exogenous sequence in the donor polynucleotide is flanked by sequences having substantial sequence identity to sequences on either side of the target site in the chromosomal sequence.

    9. (previously presented) The method of claim 1, wherein the exogenous sequence in the donor polynucleotide further comprises a targeted cleavage site that is recognized by the at least one RNA-guided endonuclease.

    10. (previously presented) The method of claim 1, wherein the nucleic acid encoding the at least one RNA-guided endonuclease is mRNA

    11. (previously presented) The method of claim 1, wherein the nucleic acid encoding the at least one RNA-guided endonuclease is DNA

    13. (previously presented) The method of claim 1, wherein the eukaryotic cell is a human cell, a nonhuman mammalian cell, or a plant cell.

    14. (original) The method of claim 1, wherein the eukaryotic cell is in vitro.

    15. (original) The method of claim 1, wherein the eukaryotic cell is in vivo.

    16. (original) The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one guide RNA is at least partially chemically synthesized.

    18. (previously presented) The method of claim [[19]] 1, wherein the Cas9 protein is from Streptococcus pyogenes strain MGAS15252 and comprises SEQ ID NO:9.

    20. (currently amended) The method of claim [[19]] 1, wherein the at least one nuclear localization signal covalently attached to the C-terminal amino acid of the Cas9 protein sequence consists of comprises SEQ ID NO:1.

    21. (currently amended) The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one RNA guided endonuclease comprising the at least one nuclear localization signal covalently attached to the C-terminal amino acid of the Cas9 protein sequence consists of comprises SEQ ID NO:2.

    22. (previously presented) The method of claim 1, wherein the nucleic acid encoding the at least one RNA-guided endonuclease is mRNA and the at least one guide RNA is comprised of two non-covalently bound RNA molecules.

    23. (previously presented) The method of claim 1, wherein the nucleic acid encoding the at least one RNA-guided endonuclease is mRNA and the at least one guide RNA is comprised of a single RNA molecule.

    24. (previously presented) The method of claim 1, wherein the nucleic acid encoding the at least one RNA-guided endonuclease is DNA, the at least one guide RNA is encoded by DNA, and the at least one guide RNA is comprised of a single RNA molecule.

    25. (previously presented) The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one donor polynucleotide is double stranded DNA.

    26. (previously presented) The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one donor polynucleotide is single stranded DNA.

    The Notice of Allowance states that:

    The [Examiner's] amendment of the claimed method to recite, "wherein the CRISPR-Cas type II system protein is a Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 protein including at least one nuclear localization signal consisting of SEQ ID NO: 1 or SEQ ID NO:2 covalently attached to the C-terminal amino acid of the Cas9 protein sequence" obviates the rejections of record.

    This claim has been narrowed to limit the nuclear localization sequence (NLS) to consist of the expressly recited sequence identified by SEQ ID Nos. 1 or 2, which were not disclosed in the prior art including CVC's earlier priority documents.  And it is interesting to note that while the Office has asserted dozens of CRISPR patents and applications in earlier rejections, only one patent (and a scientific reference) are noted in the Examiner's Reasons for Allowance.

    With regard to U.S. Application No. 15/188,924, the allowed claims are:

    1. (currently amended) A method for modifying a chromosomal sequence in a eukaryotic cell, the method comprising:
    introducing into the eukaryotic cell
        (i) at least one RNA-guided endonuclease or nucleic acid encoding at least one RNA-guided endonuclease, wherein the at least one RNA-guided endonuclease is a clustered regularly interspersed short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)/CRISPR associated (Cas) (CRISPR-Cas) type II system protein,
    wherein the nucleic acid encoding the CRISPR-Cas type II system protein is codon optimized for expression in the eukaryotic cell,
    wherein the CRISPR-Cas type II system protein is a Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 protein including at least one nuclear localization signal consisting of comprising SEQ ID NO: 1 or SEQ ID NO:2 covalently attached to the C-terminal amino acid of the Cas9 protein sequence; and
        (ii) at least one engineered guide RNA or DNA encoding at least one engineered guide RNA, each guide RNA comprising
            (1) a first region at the 5' end that base pairs with a target site in the chromosomal sequence, and
            (2) a second region that forms a secondary structure which interacts with the at least one RNA-guided endonuclease; and, optionally,
        (iii) at least one donor polynucleotide; [[and]]
    whereby the at least one guide RNA guides the at least one RNA-guided endonuclease to the target site in the chromosomal sequence where the RNA-guided endonuclease introduces a double-stranded break, the target site in the chromosomal sequence is immediately followed by a proto spacer adjacent motif (PAM), and repair of the double-stranded break by a DNA repair process leads to modification of the chromosomal sequence.

    8. (previously presented) The method of claim 1, wherein the optional donor polynucleotide comprises a donor sequence that has at least one nucleotide change relative to the chromosomal sequence near the target site in the chromosomal sequence.

    9. (original) The method of claim 8, wherein the donor sequence is flanked by sequences having substantial sequence identity to sequences on either side of the target site in the chromosomal sequence.

    10. (previously presented) The method of claim 8, wherein the donor sequence further comprises a targeted cleavage site that is recognized by the at least one RNA guided endonuclease.

    11. (previously presented) The method of claim 1, wherein the nucleic acid encoding the at least one RNA-guided endonuclease is mRNA

    12. (previously presented) The method of claim 1, wherein the nucleic acid encoding the at least one RNA-guided endonuclease is DNA

    14. (previously presented) The method of claim 1, wherein the eukaryotic cell is a human cell, a nonhuman mammalian cell, or a plant cell.

    15. (original) The method of claim 1, wherein the eukaryotic cell is in vitro.

    16. (original) The method of claim 1, wherein the eukaryotic cell is in vivo.

    17. (original) The method of claim 1, wherein the optional donor polynucleotide is not introduced into the eukaryotic cell, and repair of the double-stranded break by a non-homologous end-joining repair process results in inactivation of the chromosomal sequence.

    18. (original) The method of claim 1, wherein the optional donor polynucleotide is introduced into the eukaryotic cell, and repair of the double-stranded break results in a change of at least one nucleotide in the chromosomal sequence.

    19. (original) The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one guide RNA is at least partially chemically synthesized.

    20. (original) The method of claim 1, wherein only (i) and (ii) are introduced into the eukaryotic cell.

    21. (original) The method of claim 1, wherein (i), (ii), and (iii) are introduced into the eukaryotic cell.

    23. (currently amended) The method of claim [[24]] 1, wherein the Cas9 protein is from Streptococcus pyogenes strain MGAS15252 and comprises SEQ 10 NO:9.

    25. (currently amended) The method of claim [[24]] 1, wherein the at least one nuclear localization signal covalently attached to the C-terminal amino acid of the Cas9 protein sequence consists of comprises SEQ 10 NO:1.

    26. (currently amended) The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one RNA guided endonuclease comprising the at least one nuclear localization signal covalently attached to the C-terminal amino acid of the Cas9 protein sequence consists of comprises SEQ ID NO:2.

    27. (previously presented) The method of claim 1, wherein the nucleic acid encoding the at least one RNA-guided endonuclease is mRNA and the at least one guide RNA is comprised of two non-covalently bound RNA molecules.

    28. (previously presented) The method of claim 1, wherein the nucleic acid encoding the at least one RNA-guided endonuclease is mRNA and the at least one guide RNA is comprised of a single RNA molecule.

    29. (previously presented) The method of claim 1, wherein the nucleic acid encoding the at least one RNA-guided endonuclease is DNA, the at least one guide RNA is encoded by DNA, and the at least one guide RNA is comprised of a single RNA molecule.

    30. (previously presented) The method of claim 1, wherein the optional donor polynucleotide is double stranded DNA

    31. (previously presented) The method of claim 1, wherein the optional donor polynucleotide is single stranded DNA

    As with the '911 application, the Notice of Allowance states:

    The amendment of the claimed method to recite, "wherein the CRISPR-Cas type II system protein is a Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9 protein including at least one nuclear localization signal consisting of SEQ ID NO: 1 or SEQ ID NO:2 covalently attached to the C-terminal amino acid of the Cas9 protein sequence" obviates the rejections of record.

    And the claims are equally limited to embodiments consisting of SEQ ID Nos. 1 or 2.

    Also, the claims in U.S. Application No. 15/456,204 are not yet allowed but remain as subject matter for an interference under Rule 202:

    1. A method for modifying a chromosomal sequence in a eukaryotic cell by integrating a donor sequence, the method comprising introducing into the eukaryotic cell: (i) a Clustered Regularly Interspersed Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR)/CRISPR-associated (Cas) (CRISPR-Cas) type II protein linked to at least one nuclear localization signal (NLS) or a nucleic acid encoding the CRISPR-Cas type II protein linked to at least one NLS, wherein the CRISPR-Cas type II protein is a Cas9 protein, and the nucleic acid encoding the CRISPR-Cas type II protein is codon optimized for expression in the eukaryotic cell; (ii) a guide RNA or DNA encoding the guide RNA, wherein the guide RNA comprises a first region that is complementary to a target site in the chromosomal sequence that is immediately followed by a protospacer adjacent motif, and a second region that interacts with the CRISPR-Cas type II protein; and (iii) a donor polynucleotide comprising the donor sequence;
    wherein the guide RNA guides the CRISPR-Cas type II protein to the target site in the chromosomal sequence, the CRISPR-Cas type II protein introduces a double stranded break at the target site, and repair of the double-stranded break by a DNA repair process leads to integration or exchange of the donor sequence into the chromosomal sequence.

    (These claims have not been subject to a limiting Examiner's amendment.)  Sigma-Aldrich has withdrawn its Request under 37 C.F.R. § 41.202 for the PTAB to declare an interference with the patents and patent applications currently at issue between CVC and the Broad in Interference No. 106,115.  Sigma-Aldrich has maintained its Petition to the Director that the PTAB should declare an interference involving the claims of the '204 application without requiring an allowance ("Sigma-Aldrich does not withdraw, and specifically maintains, the portions of its Renewed Petition and its Partial Withdrawal and Supplementation directed to Sigma-Aldrich's U.S. Patent App. No. 15/456,204 ("the Sigma '204 Application")."

    That the allowed claims are exceedingly narrow is not the impediment it otherwise might be, because should the PTAB declare an interference (and Sigma-Aldrich be awarded priority of invention), the "prior art" that necessitated acceptance of these narrow claims would no longer preclude Sigma-Aldrich from obtaining claims commensurate with the scope of CRISPR-Cas9 disclosed in its applications.  The allowed claims merely overcome the procedural requirement for having allowed claims; indeed, Sigma-Aldrich affirmatively asserts in its most recent Office Action responses prior to allowance that it intends to file continuations applications having claims that interfere with CVC and Broad's patents and applications.  Interference motion practice, as has occurred between CVC and the Broad over the past nine months (and slated for culmination at Oral Hearing on May 18th) would be available to Sigma-Aldrich to craft the scope of the count and the claims corresponding thereto to its advantage.

    There is no time frame for Sigma-Aldrich's petition in the '204 application to be considered much less granted, but allowance of these claims complicates the already complicated web of determining who really owns CRISPR technology.

  • 2019 Review of Notorious Markets for Counterfeiting and Piracy

    By Kevin E. Noonan —

    U.S. Trade RepresentativeThe 2019 Review of Notorious Markets for Counterfeiting and Piracy provides a list of such markets (the NML), of both physical and virtual (online) varieties.  These include:

    Online markets:

    1337x, 1Fischier, Amazon Foreign Domains, BestBuyIPTV, Bukalapak, Carousell, Chomikuj, Cimaclub, DHGate, DYTT8, Flokinet, FMovies, Hosting Concepts B.V., MP3Juices, MPGH, NewAlbumReleases, PHIMMOI, Pindioduo, Private Layer-hosted sites, Propeller Ads, Rapidgator, RARBG, Rutracker, Sci-Hub, Seasonvar, Shopee, SnapDeal, TaoBao, ThePirateBay, Tokopedia, TorrentZ2, Turbobit, Uploaded, UPSOBox, VK, and Warmane

    Physical Markets:

    Argentina, Brazil, Cambodia, China, Ecuador, India, Kyrgyz Republic, Malaysia, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Russia, Spain, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, UAE, and Vietnam

    The NML Review is provided (and needed) because "[c]ommercial-scale copyright piracy and trademark counterfeiting cause significant financial losses for U.S. right holders and legitimate businesses, undermine critical U.S. comparative advantages in innovation and creativity to the detriment of American workers, and pose significant risks to consumer health and safety."  The Review provides "prominent and illustrative examples" of markets that "engage in or facilitate substantial piracy or counterfeiting."  The goal of disclosing these markets in the Review is to "motivate appropriate action by the private sector and governments to reduce piracy and counterfeiting."  The listed countries and markets "exemplify global counterfeiting and piracy concerns and because the scale of infringing activity in these markets can cause significant harm to U.S. intellectual property (IP) owners, consumers, legitimate online platforms, and the economy."

    Some of the markets on the NML are a mixture of legitimate and illicit activities, while others are known or suspect to be engaged solely in counterfeiting and piracy.  Inclusion in the list varies from year-to-year as the markets come and go, or governments improve enforcement or other activities to limit counterfeiting and piracy, or market owners cooperate with branded product manufacturers and purveyors.

    The NML warns that the list is not exhaustive nor has the USTR made findings of lawbreaking, deferring to the Special 301 Report for more detailed assessments.

    On a positive note, the Review commends "notable efforts to address widespread availability of pirated or counterfeit goods in some online and physical markets."  Particular successful efforts in 2019 regarding virtual content providers:

    • Ukraine's cyber police launched a nationwide anti-piracy operation that resulted in the shutting down of four popular video streaming sites with a combined daily audience of over 100,000 visitors: Kinogo, UAFilm, UKRFilm, and Kino-HD.

    • In Uruguay, Interpol and the national police closed and arrested the operators of the Pelispedia websites, a popular linking service to unlicensed movies and TV shows that attracted an estimated 44 million visits a month.

    • OpenLoad, one of the largest cyberlockers that reportedly provided pirated content to 36 of the top 50 global illegal video streaming and linking sites, was also taken offline in October 2019, along with another popular cyberlocker that was nominated as a notorious market this year, Streamango.

    • In Indonesia, the Ministry of Communications and Information in conjunction with industry groups pressured the operators of the notorious movie pirate site IndoXXI to cease operations.

    • In Thailand, Movie2free.com, Thailand's most-visited pirated movie and TV content provider that was nominated as a notorious market this year, was also shut down after successful enforcement efforts, and the administrator of the site was arrested by the Thai Department of Special Investigation.

    • Brazilian law enforcement executed Operacao 404, through which they took action against approximately 210 websites and 100 Internet Protocol television (IPTV) apps that facilitated the unauthorized streaming and downloading of films, TV shows, and live sporting events.

    Particular attention is given in the NML to illegal IPTV purveyors, the Review noting that an international team of police in Bulgaria, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, and the Netherlands, coordinated by Eurojust, carried out raids in multiple locations resulting in the shutdown of more than 200 servers used by Xtream Codes, which was responsible for over 5,000 IPTV apps streaming to about 50 million viewers.  There was also a major criminal case brought in Singapore for sales of Android set top boxes "preloaded" with infringing apps.  In the Middle East, the infringing beoutQ piracy operation was also shut down.  And notorious market Mp3va was shut down when U.S. credit card processors voluntarily agreed to terminate their support.

    Turning to physical markets, officials are extolled in the Report for Argentina, Brazil, Romani, UAE, and Vietnam.

    On a more disturbing note, the Review has an "Issue Focus" on the nexus between malware and online piracy, particularly on 1Fichier, MPGH, and ThePirateBay online markets.  Malware as defined in the Review to include backdoor Trojans, cryptominers, ransomware, and botnets, which can produce mass cyberattacks including distributed denial-of-service attacks.  What drives the nexus, according to the Review, are financial incentives that permit cybercriminals to use malware to buy and sell personal and financial information, collect ransoms, and other nefarious deeds.  The cost: $3.3 million in 2015.  Also implicated in malware schemes are copyright infringement of computer games, software, movies, music, and books, which are used as vectors for introducing malware to recipients.

    The NML Review also includes detailed descriptions of physical and online markets, their characteristics, and attempts to block or restrict their infringing activities in 2019.

    The NML concludes with URLs "[t]o assist U.S. right holders and consumers who confront IP infringement online," which include https://www.stopfakes.gov, https://eallegations.cbp.gov, and https://www.iprcenter.gov/referral.